TED Conversations

Timm Amstein

Student , TU Dresden

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

Do you want a united Europe?

Dear Europeans,

I want to take the opportunity to ask the question, all our politicians should have asked. Do you want Europe? I mean not as a union of many sovereign states! Instead I mean a united Europe. Many people are talking about it. The media sometimes use it to scare, sometimes to inpire people. Is the dream of Europe, that is dreamed by many politicians really the dream of the people? I personally think a Europe build by the people is the only way to restore our reputation and our future. In my opinion, we should start a national assembly right away and build something the world hasn't seen before. It maybe take us 10 years, but sooner or later we have to start if we don't want our future shattered by old politicians who are obsessed with their power. What do you think?

+4
Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Jun 13 2013: Read my comment on the George Papandreou speech video. I think it's been tried before in a country called the USA, which was essentially a unification of sovereign nation states. What happened though, was that gradually the sovereign states power, and the power of their citizens was gradually diminished by tyrannical government, and the rich people who controlled it.

    One of the founding fathers, -Thomas Jefferson said (when reflecting on the Revolution against the British and before the ratifying of the U.S. constitution):

    "God forbid we should ever be 20 years without such a rebellion. The people can not be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions it is a lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty (both of which are happening in the U.S. under false pretenses). What country can preserve it's liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it's natural manure."

    Much of the Constitution was drafted from the ideals of the Native American states of America (the Iroquois in particular). These people were generally honorable, and had faith in God and their fellow man. There needs were met by subsistence living. As greed became a viable concept, it was only a matter of time...

    It matters not whether it be a country great or small, as long as you are knowledgeable of who controls it and what their ultimate agenda is. If the rich are not removed somehow from financial power, nothing will change. So a unified European state is doomed to fail, if no measures are taken to combat the corruption which controls it now
    • thumb
      Jun 13 2013: As I said. Maybe the idea is doomed to fail. Maybe it's stupid to want it. It's clear that there is no blueprint or example of a successful realization. I study economics and I understand the importance of a working economic system and resulting of that the unequal distribution of power. From an economic standpoint I think it's even more necessary for europe to unite if it doesn't want to become meaningless in a globalized world. But it's not the question if it is possible or how it should be done. The question is do we want to do it? If THATS the case, we can discuss what could go wrong.

      And judging the media and the first comments of this conversation the answer to my question is more likely to be a "NO" or a "I AM NOT SURE" than a "YES, I want it with all the consequences".
    • thumb
      Jun 13 2013: "Much of the Constitution was drafted from the ideals of the Native American states of America (the Iroquois in particular). These people were generally honorable, and had faith in God and their fellow man. There needs were met by subsistence living. As greed became a viable concept, it was only a matter of time..."

      Not true
      • Jun 14 2013: Not True? ....and then nothing to back up your blatant contradiction?

        http://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/hconres331.pdf

        The founding fathers had an almost unsurpassed, uncanny, knowledge and insight into the minds of men (humans) centuries into the future. They knew, had lived, and fought against the tyranny that we see in the U.S. today. Despite the ultimate abuse and betrayal, their intentions for the Indians were generally good, as the founding fathers were honorable men of integrity also.

        When I said "As greed became a viable concept, it was only a matter of time...", -I meant it was only a matter of time before a capitalist free market economy was abused and taken advantage of by greedy selfish men. The founding fathers, and Jefferson knew this, hence his statement, "God forbid we should ever be 20 years without such a rebellion".

        The constitution is still a valid, legitimate, living document, that will always be correct, true, and relevant forever; the supreme law of the land. For decades and even centuries, our elected officials have violated their oath to abide by, defend, and protect the constitution.

        Native Americans had little or no problem with greed or corruption. As soon as the money entered the picture (expansion/industrialization), with little or no regulation or control, it opened the door for corruption and tyranny.

        "Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely" -John Dalberg-Acton
        "Give me control of a nation's money [supply] and I care not who makes the laws." - Mayer Amschel Rothschild - His ultimate plan for America was realized after his passing.
        • thumb
          Jun 14 2013: Yea I read the link the German chick put up also also as I stated to her your conclusion is non sequitur. Reread the link this time for comprehension. There were many sources for the ideas put in the constitution, not the least of which was natural law.

          She accused someone of tautology which I find ironic as if anyone is guilty of tautology it is her and you.

          Mr Pinter correctly expressed outrage at the use of coercion by the Greek government and his post was promptly removed. Indicating the water we swim in don't you think?
    • thumb
      Jun 14 2013: i would say read mine too, but it has been deleted.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.